• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump's 'rigged election' rhetoric could inspire voter intimidation, say experts

Somerville said:
A bigger question: How many white supremacists, neo-Nazis and 'good ol' boys' displaying their Second Amendment rights, will show up at polling places to intimidate voters? After all, their chosen messiah is already telling them to do just that.

"Go down to certain areas and watch and study [to] make sure other people don’t come in and vote five times."

Now, what "certain areas" could he be talking about?
Click to expand...

Blue areas. Areas where Democrats run the elections.
 
Fishking said:


Not really hard to find.
Click to expand...


Black panther guy should have brought an AR-15, then he wouldn't be intimidating anybody with his presence.
 
NonoBadDog said:
I find it interesting that Democrats are worried about election integrity all of a sudden.
Click to expand...
We've always been concerned with election security, which is why we go after the real areas in which elections are influenced. Which is why voter ID laws targeted at minorities are opposed.

Funny that conservatives are so unskeptical about the government trying to make a fundamental right more difficult to exercise. They don't even ask basic questions about how the laws are implemented. They don't ask how widespread an issue in-person voter impersonation actually is. They just read bloggers' headlines saying "eighty billion dead people may have voted!" and accept it as reality. (actual reality: zero dead votes)
 
Deuce said:
We've always been concerned with election security, which is why we go after the real areas in which elections are influenced. Which is why voter ID laws targeted at minorities are opposed.

Funny that conservatives are so unskeptical about the government trying to make a fundamental right more difficult to exercise. They don't even ask basic questions about how the laws are implemented. They don't ask how widespread an issue in-person voter impersonation actually is. They just read bloggers' headlines saying "eighty billion dead people may have voted!" and accept it as reality. (actual reality: zero dead votes)
Click to expand...

So you support IDs requirements to vote? I don't want the feds running the voting systems for the whole country. I want people that are citizens to vote the one vote that they get. We have never been hacked during an election. If I used the philosophy that you use for possible voter fraud we don't ahve to worry about being hacked or the govt taking over the system until after it has happened. Screw prevention of possibilities.
 
NonoBadDog said:
Black Panther Boss Who Got Off For Voter Intimidation Arrested - Judicial Watch
Click to expand...

So this nut case gets arrested for wearing body armor and carrying an unlicensed weapon, I'm not going to call racism on such an obvious offense. However when I go to the Judicial Watch website, I find the following words which are lies:
he and his Black Panther posse blocked a polling station in Philadelphia, clad in paramilitary outfits and brandishing weapons.
Click to expand...

The "posse" consisted of two men, one of whom was a registered poll watcher and it was Shabazz who "brandished" a billy club - singular. When someone at the polling place made a call, two officers from the Philadelphia PD showed up and told Shabazz to leave - which he did, at 10am.
 
NonoBadDog said:
So you support IDs requirements to vote? I don't want the feds running the voting systems for the whole country. I want people that are citizens to vote the one vote that they get. We have never been hacked during an election. If I used the philosophy that you use for possible voter fraud we don't ahve to worry about being hacked or the govt taking over the system until after it has happened. Screw prevention of possibilities.
Click to expand...

It is foolish to compare hacked electronic voting to in-person voter impersonation in terms of election security.

One has lower personal risk with higher possible impact, the other has high personal risk with negligible possible impact.

If I use your philosophy, I have to either accept every security measure or reject every security measure, eh?
 
Somerville said:
So this nut case gets arrested for wearing body armor and carrying an unlicensed weapon, I'm not going to call racism on such an obvious offense. However when I go to the Judicial Watch website, I find the following words which are lies:


The "posse" consisted of two men, one of whom was a registered poll watcher and it was Shabazz who "brandished" a billy club - singular. When someone at the polling place made a call, two officers from the Philadelphia PD showed up and told Shabazz to leave - which he did, at 10am.
Click to expand...

Trump is not going to scare Democrats from voting. It is stupid premise.
 
Deuce said:
It is foolish to compare hacked electronic voting to in-person voter impersonation in terms of election security.

One has lower personal risk with higher possible impact, the other has high personal risk with negligible possible impact.

If I use your philosophy, I have to either accept every security measure or reject every security measure, eh?
Click to expand...

You would look to possible problems in one situation but not the other? Rationalize it any way you want. I really don't care.
 
Paper ballots work well.
No "chad hanging factors".
Any electronic voting system can be hacked.
 
NonoBadDog said:
You would look to possible problems in one situation but not the other? Rationalize it any way you want. I really don't care.
Click to expand...

Once again you put words in my mouth, and do it badly. Rationalize that any way you want.

Voter impersonation has been investigated thoroughly. It barely happens, for exactly the reason I describe.

Think about it: How many votes would you be physically capable of casting in a day? You'd have to drive to different voting stations, because repeated votes at the same station would amplify your risk of being caught. You'd have to wait in line at each. A dozen votes? Fifteen if you're lucky? You'd also have to have a plausible identity prepared for each: you'd have to know the name of a registered voter. You could just pick random names, but it's better to have a name you know wont cast a vote. (because if both the real person and you show up, that is another flag that increases your risk)

All this effort, and I cast a handful of extra votes for Hillary Clinton. If I'm not in a swing state, the benefit is literally zero. If I'm in a swing state... have I affected anything?

Each fraudulent vote can get me up to five years in federal prison.

That's an awfully high risk, with virtually no gain. And in the utterly remote instance where I actually do swing the election, the benefits go to Hillary Clinton. I don't get elected, she does. I don't gain power and wealth, she does. Maybe I made a deal with her campaign... for what? Nobody is giving me a cabinet position in exchange for my ten or twelve extra votes. No juicy government contract is coming my way, it's going to 3M in exchange for their millions in campaign funding.

And to actually swing an election, I'd need to find literally thousands, probably tens or even hundreds of thousands of people willing to take this risk. Even a down-to-the vote election like 2000 would require a lot of people to have cast votes for Gore in Florida... and successfully predicting that Florida would end up being the breaking point.

In 2012, Obama beat Romney by five million votes. Imagine the enormous effort that would have been required to swing it to Romney. As the size of the conspiracy grows, the odds of getting caught multiply.
 
Last edited:
And the experts are: "election lawyers, donors and a former member of Congress".
 
Somerville said:
In your mind then, a 4 or 5 armed white guys standing outside a polling station is less intimidating than two black guys, one with a night stick, standing around?
Click to expand...

You can keep with your stupid premise dude, really. You don't need me to agree. That is what we call "rights". I whole heatedly support your right to present stupid theories, like Trump scaring Democrats away from the polls. :lamo
 
NonoBadDog said:
You can keep with your stupid premise dude, really. You don't need me to agree. That is what we call "rights". I whole heatedly support your right to present stupid theories, like Trump scaring Democrats away from the polls. :lamo
Click to expand...

:lamo Yeah, I "Laff My Ass Off" at you also. When you post, "That is what we call "rights". in response to a simple question you apparently are agreeing with me, that "4 or 5 armed white guys standing outside a polling station is less intimidating than two black guys, "

It seems to be so easy for the hyper-partisan of any flavour to see the words they believe were written rather what has actually been typed onto the screen.

No one is accusing "Trump of scaring Democrats away from the polls." rather it is a certain segment of Trump SUPPORTERS who would make such attempts.
 
Somerville said:
:lamo Yeah, I "Laff My Ass Off" at you also. When you post, "That is what we call "rights". in response to a simple question you apparently are agreeing with me, that "4 or 5 armed white guys standing outside a polling station is less intimidating than two black guys, "

It seems to be so easy for the hyper-partisan of any flavour to see the words they believe were written rather what has actually been typed onto the screen.

No one is accusing "Trump of scaring Democrats away from the polls." rather it is a certain segment of Trump SUPPORTERS who would make such attempts.
Click to expand...

Rhetoric and diversion. I am not surprised. From your OP:
Somerville said:
Will his inflammatory rhetoric inspire violence the day following Hillary's victory at the polls?
Trump's 'rigged election' rhetoric could inspire voter intimidation, say experts

Donald Trump’s claims that if he loses in November it will be due to a “rigged” election have sparked strong bipartisan criticism from election lawyers, donors and a former member of Congress who warn that the Republican candidate’s words are dangerous, fueling doubts about the election’s legitimacy and potentially leading to voter intimidation.

As his poll numbers have weakened and his high-decibel spats with critics escalated, Trump has raised the specter of rigged elections and suggested that if he loses it might well be because of voter fraud.

“The only way we can lose, in my opinion, I really mean this, Pennsylvania, is if cheating goes on,” Trump told a largely white rally last month in Altoona, Pennsylvania. “Go down to certain areas and watch and study [to] make sure other people don’t come in and vote five times.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

He is going to scare Democrats away from the polls? Note the last bolded statement. His poll numbers have weakened? Far from it. Clinton's numbers have tanked in the last four weeks. This is a pretty good indicator that the desperation is increasing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom